Index
> Main > NASM and FASMGoto page Previous 1, 2 |
| Author |
|
|
pelaillo 31 May 2004, 04:18
crc wrote: given the complexity of the codebase! That's IMHO the greatest advantage of Fasm over Nasm: Fasm sources are clear water. Actually I'm able to write in Fasm every thing I could in Nasm but I use a very simple subset of features. From time to time I get surprised at seeing several Fasm capabilities that I was not aware of. It would be interesting to know which Nasm features are missing in Fasm to see how them could be implemented either via macros or in the sources. |
|||
31 May 2004, 04:18 |
|
|
fasm9 31 May 2004, 04:53
Does nasm used by any other project(include linux itself)??
binutils.. aptitude.. |
|||
|
31 May 2004, 04:53 |
|
|
scientica 31 May 2004, 11:12
Well, afaik most of the asm in the kernel is GAS'd syntax ('nuff said about AT&T syntex...), but I wonder what asm GMplayer etc are usinng (checked, code
 gas...)
But I guess there isn't much asm in linux at all (could be due to the portabillity issue), but still, asm is used for apps (like for using mmx, 3dNow!, sse[12], isse, etc). The things is taht since nasm has been virutally eded for so long has (imo, sadly) given gas a head start. |
|||
|
31 May 2004, 11:12 |
|
|
fasm9 01 Jun 2004, 00:46
binutils -> glibc -> gcc -> linux -> g++,gcj,gnat, -> everything(but nasm creat nothing..)
. fasm -> menuetos -> menuetlibc -> next generation compiler(?) OR . fasm -> menuetlibc(native mode) -> menuetos(bootstrappping version) -> native c/c++/java/... . fasm -> *???* so anything possible, any machine, any new technology when close raw electronics. -- glibc <-> dietlibc, uclibc. |
|||
|
01 Jun 2004, 00:46 |
|
|
scientica 01 Jun 2004, 15:48
If we just could promote fasm to the big distors (Gentoo, Fedora Core [12], Mandrake, SuSE, etc), and provide working examples, nice tutorials and help convert other asm code to fasm code, I think we can get more and more to realise what we know: fasm is the one and only choice for x86 asm
 |
|||
|
01 Jun 2004, 15:48 |
|
|
pelaillo 01 Jun 2004, 17:44
scientica, BTW do you know why Bazik are not longer interested in assembly since he becomes Gentoo's developper? I find it somewhat strange he didn't make available an 'emerge fasm'
|
|||
|
01 Jun 2004, 17:44 |
|
|
fasm9 02 Jun 2004, 00:06
3. Final conclusion: fasm can be used for specialized linux, for example,
directly interact with hardware, like svgalib, directfb. http://blueflops.sourceforge.net/ http://www.geexbox.org/en/index.html or you need right compiler written in fasm and lots of time to be convention. Quote: I find it somewhat strange he didn't make available an 'emerge fasm' 1. short answer: maybe portability? ===================== 2. long answer: code-base, code-convention are different, linux developer(even kernel developer) seldom touch assembly, not because they fear it, but they have enough accumulated knowledge how they control hardware through GDB(and objdump, strace, ) WITHOUT assembly, but Actually, they use assembly everyday when they have to creat something that mission critical. how? in gdb, in gcc, in as, in ld. when something they wants in low level, they wrap it through llibrary, languAges, interpreter and wrap it again. -- PS: sometimes C is called high level assembly, i guess they(Dennis Ritchie, Ken Thompson) translated the machine code to 'C' 1:1 using regular expression* and ?algol?. Quote:
*: http://www.papert.com/articles/embodiments.html |
|||
|
02 Jun 2004, 00:06 |
|
|
pelaillo 02 Jun 2004, 03:57
fasm9 wrote: 1. short answer: maybe portability? Not enough reason to left 80%* gentoo users without fasm 
*-This is a guess, of course |
|||
|
02 Jun 2004, 03:57 |
|
|
Mac2004 04 Jun 2004, 05:22
I have used NASM previously a lot. I think Fasm produces nowdays much more better code than Nasm.
Ie. Writing with Nasm and using REP MOVS commands causes the output produced by Nasm to crash in spite of same code working in fasm. Opcodes outputted by nasm are not correct in this case. And there are many other cases where it is sometimes difficult say why simple code is not working at all and it has been tested on other assemblers as well. regards, Mac2004 |
|||
|
04 Jun 2004, 05:22 |
|
|
crc 04 Jun 2004, 13:02
Quote: 1. short answer: maybe portability? This *is* enough of a reason for most distros to ignore FASM (and apps written in assembly language as a whole). While some distros do include NASM, the versions are almost always broken, and are always out of date. What is needed is a good, popular application to be written in assembly before distro makers will start including FASM. I still prefer NASM, but then again, once FASM has native BeOS and FreeBSD ports, it'll run on all of the OSes I use, and I'm starting to like some of its macro facilities. I already include it in my personal Linux distro which I'll release someday... |
|||
|
04 Jun 2004, 13:02 |
|
|
pelaillo 04 Jun 2004, 13:24
crc wrote: ...once FASM has native BeOS and FreeBSD ports, it'll run on all of the OSes I use, and I'm starting to like some of its macro facilities. I already include it in my personal Linux distro which I'll release someday... crc, what about creating a native port of Fasm for FreeBSD? I hope yor distro to see the light soon so it will become the first distro that includes Fasm. What other features are you intended to add to your distro? |
|||
|
04 Jun 2004, 13:24 |
|
|
Tomasz Grysztar 04 Jun 2004, 13:38
There already is some distro containing fasm:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/sorcerer/sources/fasm/ |
|||
|
04 Jun 2004, 13:38 |
|
|
crc 05 Jun 2004, 01:25
My Linux distro is homegrown. It fits on a floppy, and has two Forth interpreters (IsForth & RetroForth), FASM, RetroLisp, and a crude BASIC interpreter. I have a really simple shell, but will be switching to the KISS shell before I release my distro later this month. (BTW, it does not use any of the GNU tools with their bloatware!). There are three text editors (a clone of VI, and two homegrown ones) as well. Everything is statically linked or written in assembly and uses direct system calls, so file sizes tend to be less than 12k per program.
I've just started working with FreeBSD. Once I understand the system calls better, I'll see if I can write a FreeBSD port of FASM |
|||
|
05 Jun 2004, 01:25 |
|
|
pelaillo 05 Jun 2004, 15:11
It will become the fastest linux out there. Looking forward in order to become a fan
. |
|||
|
05 Jun 2004, 15:11 |
|
| Goto page Previous 1, 2 < Last Thread | Next Thread > |
Forum Rules:
|